Both FR10 tooling quotes use our housing mass to claim suitability; one has a longer adapter and the other different fingers, so the quoted weight doesn't describe either loaded assembly.
two fr10 tools, one bare housing weight
AnikaBennett0769 · 22 Mar 2026, 00:21 UTC
19 replies
Replying to AnikaBennett0769
Ask each supplier for the complete loaded assembly mass, centre of gravity and inertia information, tied to its drawing revision. Who will assess those with the intended motion and robot configuration?
21pointsReplying to AnikaBennett0769
Get both proposals drawn at pickup and release too; longer fingers may be avoiding a nest obstruction that the lighter-looking option hasn't considered.
3pointsReplying to AnikaBennett0769
Does the longer adapter leave room to remove the tool for maintenance? I would check that before its complete weight becomes the only comparison.
7pointsReplying to BenBrown0892
Integrator owns the application assessment, Sam; Yasmin, only pickup is shown, and Ben, tool removal hasn't been reviewed. I've sent those gaps to both suppliers.
8pointsReplying to AnikaBennett0769
Include contact-face detail. We had two finger sets described identically on their bags, but only one had the relief the sample needed. A complete mass figure for the wrong contact shape would have been impressively precise and still useless.
7pointsReplying to BethBell0672
Beth, exactly. Anika, ask what the differing fingers do at your receiving nest, rather than letting both sellers answer only whether they can hold the housing.
6pointsReplying to AnikaBennett0769
Does the integrator have an agreed assessment scope, or have the suppliers simply assigned the work to them?
11pointsReplying to SamBell0681
Agreed scope, including both candidates and our intended transfer. No assessment result yet; the integrator is waiting for complete supplier data.
7pointsReplying to AnikaBennett0769
Then don't let either quote quietly price that assessment twice. Or leave it out twice, which is the more traditional version.
11pointsReplying to AnikaBennett0769
Are the adapters and fittings included in the data request?
12pointsReplying to BethBell0672
Yes, Beth, complete assemblies. One supplier just sent its finger-only mass again, so that response has gone back.
20pointsReplying to AnikaBennett0769
Which one? I'm curious whether the longer adapter is the uncounted part, not trying to award the other tool a prize yet.
10pointsReplying to YasminBrown0876
The longer-adapter proposal. Its supplier is now adding the adapter and fittings; the other supplier has sent a complete assembly drawing but no inertia information yet.
14pointsReplying to AnikaBennett0769
Useful to keep the missing information itemised by candidate. Neither is ready for the integrator to finish its assessment from what you have described.
17pointsReplying to AnikaBennett0769
And has either returned the release and removal views, Anika? Those don't need to wait for the mass arithmetic.
21pointsReplying to BenBrown0892
Ben, agreed. Geometry and the loaded-assembly assessment can move together, provided everyone keeps the same drawing revision.
12pointsReplying to BenBrown0892
Release views arrived. The short-adapter tool needs a different receiving insert, now priced separately. Longer adapter clears the existing nest in its drawing; both removal views remain outstanding.
21pointsReplying to AnikaBennett0769
There it is: two different complete jobs to price. Does inspection accept the proposed insert change in principle, or has only the tool supplier looked at it?
8pointsReplying to YasminBrown0876
Only the tool supplier so far. Inspection has the drawing for review; I haven't added the insert as an accepted change.
17pointsDiscussion closed
This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .